Funeral for German WWII veteran Erich Priebke highlights Papal Hypocrisy

Editor’s Note: SSPX priests are not under the control of the Vatican. The SSPX was driven out of the Church of Rome by Paul VI and John Paul II and was never fully rehabilitated by the quondam Pope Benedict. The funeral Mass the SSPX offered for Mr. Priebke was in defiance of the diocese of Rome.

_____________

SSPX burial of Nazi war criminal met with protestors

By Cindy Wooden • Catholic Herald (UK)  • October 17, 2013

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/10/17/sspx-burial-of-nazi-war-criminal-met-with-protestors/

(An Afterword by Michael Hoffman follows this article)

The traditionalist Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) offered to celebrate a funeral for convicted war criminal Erich Priebke after the Diocese of Rome said the service would be allowed only in a private home.

However violent protests outside the chapel forced the cancellation of the Mass, with some 500 protesters gathering on Tuesday outside the SSPX district headquarters in Albano, south of Rome, when a hearse carrying Priebke’s body arrived. People shouted “murderer” and beat the hearse.

Violence broke out after the arrival of a small group of people described by witnesses as neo-Nazis. Riot police intervened and two people were taken into custody, but the protesters remained and, according to Priebke’s lawyer, made it impossible for friends and relatives of the former Nazi SS officer to get to the chapel.

The lawyer, Paolo Giachini, told reporters outside the SSPX headquarters that the funeral Mass had not taken place, but that he had fulfilled his obligation to arrange a funeral. “Now it’s up to the authorities to decide what to do with the body,” since he was unable to find a city where Priebke could be buried.

Priebke died last Friday at the age of 100. A former captain in the SS, he was convicted of carrying out a 1944 massacre of 335 Italian civilians in the Ardeatine Caves outside Rome. At the time of his death, he was serving his sentence under house arrest.

Priebke continued to claim he was only following orders when he took part in the Ardeatine Caves’ massacre and, shortly before he died, he affirmed his belief that the Holocaust was an invention.

The Diocese of Rome had refused Giachini’s request to allow a funeral to take place in a church or chapel.

In a statement issued on Monday, the diocese said, “Considering all the circumstances of the case, the ecclesial authorities believed that prayer for the deceased and entrusting him to the mercy of God — the aims of a religious funeral — should take place in the strictest privacy.”

“Prayers for the dead were never denied,” the diocese said, but the church had a right to insist the rites be “reserved and discreet.”

Bishop Marcello Semeraro of Albano, secretary of Pope Francis’ Council of Cardinals, told Rome’s Corriere della Sera newspaper Oct. 16 that the church would never prohibit prayers for someone, but canon law does allow a bishop to deny a public funeral to a “manifest sinner” when it would scandalize the faithful.

In Priebke’s case, he said, “the crime was public and notorious, the lack of conversion was public and notorious, and the scandal it would have raised in the Christian community was public and notorious.”

After agreeing to host the funeral, the Italian district of the Society of St. Pius X issued a statement on its website saying, “A Christian who was baptized and received the sacraments of confession and the Eucharist, no matter what his faults and sins were, to the extent that he dies reconciled with God and the church, has a right to the celebration of the holy Mass and a funeral.”

The statement said the SSPX condemns “every form of anti-Semitism and racial hatred, but also hatred under all its forms. The Catholic religion is one of mercy and forgiveness.”

The SSPX has a history of comments by its leaders expressing suspicion or hostility toward Jews. In 2009, after now-retired Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of the society’s bishops, there was widespread outrage at revelations that one of the four, Bishop Richard Williamson, had denied the gassing of Jews in Nazi concentration camps. The SSPX later ousted Bishop Williamson.

The New York-based Anti-Defamation League, which combats anti-Semitism, issued a statement on Monday saying it was “shocked” that a “fringe Catholic sect” would agree to host the funeral of a “notorious Nazi war criminal.” (End quote)

Michael Hoffman's Afterword 

700,000 Israelis and world dignitaries attended the Israeli state funeral last week of Shas party “Torah sage” Ovadia Yosef, the rabbi who repeatedly declared that the Arab people should be exterminated, and gentiles are merely donkeys intended for service to the Chosen People. The Vatican sent their condolences to the Israelis over the death of Ovadia, and the western media largely whitewashed or minimized the Shas rabbi's record of hate speech, in his role as spiritual leader of a right wing political party that has held powerful cabinet posts under Netanyahu, and helped to implement oppressive policies toward Palestinians and racist attitudes in the Israeli army of occupation. In the face of these facts, the intolerance toward a church funeral for Priebke in Rome demonstrates the liberal hypocrisy of the Vatican and the current pope as he offers incense to sodomites and insults to a "Christian who was baptized and received the sacraments of confession and the Eucharist.”

Note that the “diocese of Rome” ( Pope Francis is of course the bishop of Rome), denies the facts and asserts that Priebke showed a "lack of conversion” that "was public and notorious.” To what does Rome refer? It almost certainly refers to Priebke having persisted in the "mortal sin" of doubting the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz, a recently minted sacred dogma that has been enforced with inquisitorial fervor by every pope from John Paul II to the current Uriah Heep Pontiff.

[Hoffman is the author of Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not and The Great Holocaust Trial]

A Catholic Layman Objects

Dear Michael,

I have no problem with criticizing things going on at the highest levels of the Catholic Church.  I have a problem, however, with your following assertion unless you openly admit to your audience of it being of a rhetorical nature and not a factual assertion: "It almost certainly refers to Priebke having persisted in the "mortal sin" of doubting the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz, a recently minted sacred dogma that has been enforced with inquisitorial fervor by every pope from John Paul II to the current Uriah Heep Pontiff." 

It is basic to our understanding of the Catholic Faith that a dogma is a defined doctrine of the Catholic Faith.  I know of nothing in the history of the Catholic Church wherein that Church has raised "doubting the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz" to a "sacred dogma" by defining it as such.  (Appearances alone can not substitute for reality.)  Do you?  If the answer is in the affirmative, please be so kind as to cite "chapter and verse."  Otherwise, please back off the rhetoric unless you provide an open qualification to same.  The use of rhetoric can be quite fine, of course, but if misused it can certainly damage one's own credibility.

Sincerely,

(Name withheld)

________________

Hoffman replies to the Catholic Layman:

Dear Sir,

This is the same hair-splitting that is utilized to defend the Church of Rome from the truth that it has transformed usury from a mortal sin that was, to one that now is not. Fact: the taking of interest on loans of money is no longer a mortal sin in the post-Renaissance Church. Any Catholic “Payday" Shylock who charges 10, 20, 50, 200, 300 or 400% interest on a loan can receive the Eucharist and be considered in good standing in the Church if he otherwise abstains from mortal sins which are still recognized as such. When we assert this fact in our book Usury in Christendom, apologists reply that Rome has not formally defined usury as no longer being a sin.

This kind of rabbinic escape clause does not impress. The best standard is, "By their fruits ye shall know them." The Vatican operates a usury bank in Vatican City. Catholics throughout the world may be found in the ranks of usurers, and Catholic usurers are in good standing with the Church. The Code of Canon Law encourages usury (Canon 1294). For those who have eyes to see, the mortal sin of charging interest on loans is no longer a sin in the Church of Rome. This is a revolutionary overthrow of a sacred dogma. 

When we assert that the Church of Rome has made belief in the existence of homocidal gas chambers in Auschwiz a sacred dogma, we use this term as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary: 1. Sacred: "Set apart for or dedicated to some religious purpose, and hence entitled to veneration or religious respect; made holy by association with a god or other object of worship; consecrated, hallowed." 2. Dogma: "The body of opinion formulated or authoritatively stated; systematized belief."

In the speeches and writings of Popes John Paul II (who called the alleged gas chamber operation by the rabbinic term "the Shoah"), Benedict XVI and Francis, the legendary execution chambers of Auschwitz are non-negotiable articles of dogmatic faith. Furthermore,  Rome is on record having made belief in the tale of homicidal gassings a criterion for exercising ecclesiastic office (declaration of the Vatican Secretariat of State to Bishop Richard N. Williamson, Feb. 4, 2009).

There is a massive movement underway led by an Israeli academic, together with wealthy Hollywood movie director James Cameron, to deny the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This international movement produces Resurrection-denial books, docudramas and symposia. This is the greatest possible threat to belief in Jesus Christ, as the Apostle Paul affirmed (I Cor. 15: 17-18). The Vatican and the current and last two popes have invested nowhere near the equivalent energy and outrage countering Resurrection-denial as they have evinced for fighting "Holocaust-denial."

As Dr. Robert Faurisson has documented, Pope Pius XII, the pontiff in office during World War II, never once undertook any handwriting or hand-wringing about "gas chamber extermination." Catholics might want to ask themselves why it has suddenly become incumbent on subsequent popes to make a dogma out of faith in supposed Auschwitz execution gas chambers, when Pius XII did not trouble to mention them even once during or after WWII -- in spite of  having received intelligence reports from priests who heard the confessions of German-Catholic Auschwtiz camp personnel, as the late Hans Schmidt has pointed out?

The whole idea of a church deifying one side of a history debate is preposterous. It is the sort of  nauseating submission to worldly political correctness and opinion polls which post-Vatican II pontiffs perform in order to ingratiate themselves with the western media, and gain “a better p.r. image for the Church." If Mr. Priebke had gone to his grave whimpering to the ADL and the Simon Wiesenthal Center about the "cosmic evil of the Auschwitz execution gas chambers" he probably would have been permitted a discreet funeral in a tiny church on some Roman cul-de-sac. But he chose not to submit to the sordid idol of Holocaustianity which, barring a miracle, will be one of the few "sacred dogmas" which the Church of Rome will continue to enforce, even after it has embraced clemency and approbation for unrepentant sodomites and usurers.

What you seem to forget is that in the post-modern world a functioning tyranny over the mind of man no longer requires de fide proclamations to convey or enforce dogma. Dogma is internalized in the faithful by the zeitgeist, and our depraved culture of situation ethics, apathy and cowardice, which stem from that spirit. This is how the post-Renaissance Church of Rome mints its sacred dogmas in our time.

For further research: Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s Record of Hate Speech

Note:

On the Contrary blog is reader-funded. If you are receiving something of value, is it not fair and just to give something in return? You can donate online or by sending a contribution to the address below.

Independent History and Research • Box 849 • Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816 USA

____________

Read More

Pope Francis reveals his true face

By Michael Hoffman

www.revisionisthistory.org

In an interview filled with what we can only term theological gobbledegook with nary a reference to the Bible, but loads of mystical vertiginous malarkey, Francis the pope of Rome has come out with unprecedented cold-hearted malice toward defenseless, unborn children.

Let us anticipate the response of his defenders and rejoin in advance: no, the pope was not quoted out of context, or misquoted. We’re going to give you his quote in context; and it is said he was handed a copy of his interview and allowed to check and edit it before its publication in the Jesuit magazine, America.

Here are the pontiff’s documented words, in context. First on homosexuality:

“We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.  

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.” (End quote).

Where in the catechism does it say the pontiff has no right to judge a homosexual?

What is this pope babbling about when he says, “...it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person”?

Furthermore, what is “gay” about sodomy? If God, as the pope claims, “endorses the existence” of a person who practices sodomy, how could God ever send that person to hell?

Nowhere does the pope mention a little something known as sin. He offers no reasons for the sodomite to stop sodomizing. After all, God Himself “endorses the existence” of the sodomite. So why not continue in one’s sins? What is the impetus for change?

The pontiff’s documented words, in context, on abortion and contraception:

"We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time...The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently...We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel.”  (End quote).

Perhaps someone should tell the pope it is not necessary for the post-Vatican II Church to insist only on issues related to the Nazi “Holocaust," anti-semitism and the defense of Talmudic Judaism as possessing an unbroken covenant with God. "We have to find a new balance." Does the pope agree? Would he be caught dead saying that the pastoral ministry cannot be “obsessed” with the Nazi “Holocaust”?

We don't believe, short of a divine miracle, Francis would ever make such a statement, for unlike the dehumanized and marginalized unborn children awaiting the executioner's invasion of their mother's womb, the Nazi "Holocaust" lobby has enormous power on earth. The victims of the abortion holocaust have no such lobby with comparable power on earth.

Let us also not forget that this coffin-rider who calls himself pope is declaring that too much has been said against birth control (contraception). The people who brought the Gospel to the world, who inhabit the nations of Britain, Ireland, Europe, Canada, Australia and the United States, are self-extinguishing due to contraception being winked at by their religious leaders — and now it is minimized by the pope himself. This is incredible. It is totally revolutionary. Even the pope of Vatican II, Paul VI, devoted himself to composing the encyclical Humane Vitae, closing the door forever on artificial contraception. But Francis declares, "We have to find a new balance.” Between what, life and death? (Rev. 3:15).

According to fake prophecies cooked up during the Renaissance and attributed to the medieval St. Malachy, the current Pope Francis is the last pontiff, dubbed, in that phony prophecy, “Peter Romanus.”

We propose a new name for him, Diabolus Romanus.

Hoffman is the author of Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not.

***

Read More

Pope Francis bans the Tridentine Mass for Franciscan Order

Rorate Caeli writes:

"...our interest in this matter is not so much related to the internal workings and troubles of a particular order... but to the extremely grave precedent the Braz de Aviz Decree sets for the rights recognized (not created!) in Summorum Pontificum, and to the way the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pontifical Commission 'Ecclesia Dei' (and the Apostolic Signatura, by the probable limitation of appeal) were short-circuited in a matter of their competence.”

Michael Hoffman’s comment on the preceding: Is it not true that 'traditional Catholics' support papal absolutism, indeed papal dictatorship? Absolute power corrupts absolutely, ergo don’t be too shocked when the people’s liturgical rights are steamrolled by the supreme monarchy that is the papacy. You have a revolutionary serving as pope. He will use the power you and other 'traditional Catholics' concede is his, to violate what are Biblical, apostolic and patristic rights that he has no divine right to derogate or abrogate. Without a mechanism to discipline a pope when he departs from his role as guardian of the faith of Jesus Christ, only masochists would complain about the blows that will inevitably come from a Jacobin pope with a revolutionary agenda to impose. Thanks for this are due in part to the author of Summorum Pontificum, our latter day “Celestine V” (Benedict XVI), who seems destined for the same fate in The Inferno which Dante Alighieri assigned to the other Celestine.
____________________

Pope forbids Franciscan order from offering traditional Tridentine Mass without special permission of the hierarchy

With an Afterword by Michael Hoffman

____________________

Franciscan group forbidden to use traditional liturgy

CWN - July 29, 2013

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=18607

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350567?eng=y

The Vatican has appointed a new leader for the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, and ruled that all priests of the group must celebrate Mass using the ordinary form rather than the traditional Latin Mass.

The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate have grown rapidly, and became especially prominent in traditionalist circles. But the group has also been torn by internal disputes-- including disputes over liturgical practices. The Congregation for Religious has now issued a decree that installs an outsider-- a Capuchin, Father Fidenzio Volpi-- as acting superior for the order.

The decree also states that the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate must use the ordinary form of the liturgy. Any use of the extraordinary form must be explicitly authorized by Church authorities, the decree states. This special rule, which applies only to the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, marks a departure from Summorum Pontificum, in which Pope Benedict XVI ruled that priests are authorized to use the extraordinary form for their private Masses without any further approval from superiors.

The decree bears the date of July 11, 2013, the protocol number 52741/2012, and the signatures of the prefect of the congregation, Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, a focolarino,  and of the secretary of the same congregation, Archbishop José Rodríguez Carballo, a Franciscan. Carballo enjoys the pope's complete trust. His promotion as second-in-command of the congregation was backed by Francis himself at the beginning of his pontificate. It is difficult, therefore, to think that pope Bergoglio was unaware of what he was approving when he was presented with the decree before its publication.

The astonishment stems from the fact that what is decreed contradicts the dispositions given by Benedict XVI, which for the celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite “sine populo" demand no previous request for authorization whatsoever: "Ad talem celebrationem secundum unum alterumve Missale, sacerdos nulla eget licentia, nec Sedis Apostolicae nec Ordinarii sui.

The fact is that one pillar of the pontificate of Joseph Ratzinger has been cracked. By an exception that many fear - or hope - will soon become the rule.

There is a thorough pro-and-con dispute over the “Summorum Pontificum” in a book hot off the presses by Professor Pietro De Marco of the University of Florence and the liturgist Andrea Grillo: Ecclesia universa o introversa? (Edizioni San Paolo, Cinisello Balsamo, 2013).

In criticizing the motu proprio of Benedict XVI, Grillo rejects even its prescriptive validity. Because in his judgment, the ancient missal prior to Vatican Council II has been abrogated. And therefore there is no longer any reason that could justify its use. Grillo teaches sacramental and liturgical theology at the Pontifical Atheneum of Saint Anselm in Rome.

Michael Hoffman's Afterword

What do we say about a man who has been granted the authority to tyrannize, as Pope Francis is doing? The media paints him as an  avuncular, "humble" liberal, while they ignore his politically correct inquisition against the ancient Tridentine Mass. Are we doing our duty to God when we respond to this papal tyranny by saying that he is a bad pope or an anti-pope, as it has been said of at least three of the past four popes since 1960? Or might it not be time, at two minutes to midnight on the clock of destiny, to at long last question whether or not giving absolute power to any man --be he pope or potentate-- to nullfy and overthrow, with Leninist revolutionary ferocity, every noble or venerable rite that sanctified millions before him? Does the pope have the "right" to send souls to eternal perdition? We are not afraid to state that it is high time that Catholics rethink the absolute power that was granted to popes incrementally -- during the same centuries which saw the popes grant incremental permission for the mortal sin of usury. If Catholics refuse to think freely on this point with their God-given faculties of reason, they will have only themselves to blame as the popes of the revolution continue to dismantle, with a zeal equal to inquisitorial Protestant tyrants of the past, the Catholic faith of their fathers.

***

Read More

"Vicar of Christ on Earth" asks "Who am I to judge a gay priest?"

by Michael Hoffman

www.revisionisthistory.org

The Renaissance Catholic Church's embrace of usury was accomplished under a host of weasel words and euphemisms which have bedazzled and befuddled true believers in the Church of Rome since 1515. The encyclical "Vix Pervenit" of the usury advocate Pope Benedict XIV is a case in point. It was 95% anti-usury and 5% double talk that created an escape clause permitting certain types of usury. It is defended to this day by certain mind-bombed "conservative Catholic scholars" as a bastion against usury.

From instances such as this we should know that it is a major blunder to imagine that the double talk and fork-tongued lucubrations of the current Pope Francis are a product of a "Vatican II mentality of the 1960s." If you believe that, then the Vatican Cryptocracy has you wrapped in its mind control as tightly as a spider ensnares a fly. Let's banish the amnesia: "Vix Pervenit" was issued in 1745, not 1965.

Observe how Pope Francis approaches the sodomite issue. The New York Times reports that he stated to reporters aboard the papal jet, "If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?" (Cf. "Pope Says He Will Not Judge Gay Priests," NY Times (online), July 29, 2013).

Did he actually use the Orwellian Newspeak word for sodomy -- "gay"? If so, that in itself is a grave failure to call a thing that which it is.

Do you spot the hook in the pope's double talk? Do you see the escape clause he has given his right wing? He doesn't say he refuses to judge homosexual acts, only that he refuses to judge if some priest is a homosexual -- this gives his right wing the chance to suppose he is referring to a celibate priest of a "homosexual orientation." That's the escape clause his right wing supporters will use to tamp down the uproar: "The pope is only saying he will not judge priests of good faith who are of a gay orientation. He is not endorsing gay sex." (In the days ahead there will also be subsequent "clarifications" intended to serve as damage control to patch wounded right wing sensibilities).

Even in that case it’s a huge betrayal. Identifying human beings as being stamped indelibly with “gay orientation” reaffirms the popular myth that the majority of homosexuals “were born that way” and “cannot change.” Actually the reverse is true. The Cryptocracy encourages androgyny and homosexuality, for one thing because it helps to reduce the “surplus” population and for another, it leads them into a rootless anarchy that makes them susceptible to further revolutionary, anti-natural change. A normal young person with an attraction for the opposite sex can be seduced by the culture into experimenting with homosexual acts and then, as a result of the experiment, be told they have a permanent “gay orientation.”

Any true Vicar of Christ would have informed the journalists on his plane: “With God all things are possible, and some who believe that in their orientation they are homosexual, can, through prayer and purity of heart and mind, clarify their desires and discover a healthy attraction for the opposite sex, buried under assumptions and delusions imposed on them by a culture that values fashionable trends above Biblical ethics and human ennoblement. The homosexual is a celebrated person in contemporary culture. This leads to people identifying themselves with the homosexual condition even if, in the core of their being, it is not really the case with them. Meanwhile, the bedrock of society, the heroic mothers and fathers of many children who labor daily to provide their families with sustenance and an education, are viewed by the advertising and other media as unattractive drudges, the very last people to be emulated. Do not expect me to endorse these pathologies.”  This is what Francis would have said if he were a pope worthy of the name.

The supporters of "Pope Francis" on the left will seize on the obvious reckless symbolism of his statement and interpret his words broadly and in the manner most people, including youth, will perceive them --it's not morally objectionable to be a sodomite "if you seek the Lord" while doing so. 

If the pope's homosexual priests were of a neo-Nazi instead of a sodomite orientation, I'd bet you dollars to doughnuts that this pontiff would judge them right into the Inferno's eternal barbecue pit. But when it comes to priests who simply yearn for anal sex, it is not something that falls under his judgment as mere Pontifex Maximus.

______________________________

"If the pope's homosexual priests were of a neo-Nazi instead of a sodomite orientation, I'd bet you dollars to doughnuts that this pontiff would judge them right into the Inferno's eternal barbecue pit. But when it comes to priests who simply yearn for anal sex, it is not something that falls under his judgment as mere Pontifex Maximus."

______________________________

Imagine some sexually confused adolescent Catholic boy of 15 or 16 who is drawn to girls mostly, but somewhat tempted by boys, reading today's headlines about the pope. If that Catholic boy chooses a "gay orientation," Francis wants him to know that as pope he does not have the power or authority to "judge" him. If the boy goes out and gets sodomized, the Catholic right wing will reply, "It's not the Holy Father's fault, he didn't approve of sodomy, he only withheld judgement on sodomite orientation."

From our own research it is becoming increasingly clear that as the sterility of money-breeding-money (usury) was incrementally permitted by the Church of Rome beginning in the early 16th century, the practice of sodomy also rose exponentially inside the high ranks of the Roman clergy beginning in the early 16th century, shrouded in a prelatical secrecy which has endured from then until now. We draw your attention to the patent fact that sodomy is also a form of sterility.

Pope Francis is a reflection of this pro-sodomite current, formerly underground and now emerging in the open as Revelation-of-the Method, while the media gives its enthusiastic imprimatur to this latter day Uriah Heep as the pope of "humility." 

It's no wonder that millions of Latin American Christians are fleeing Rome for the chapels of Protestant churches that do not deviate from bedrock Biblical, Apostolic and Patristic Christianity. They don't have an "infallible" pope over them to misdirect them into losing their eternal salvation. They are free to choose to adhere to Biblical Truth and defy the sodomite movement, independent of Rome's latest coffin-riding grave digger, the most recent in a line stretching back through more than forty popes of usury. Catholics who are not brain dead need to begin to dare to think deeply and with the fear of God, about the deception and destruction that has been wrought by popes of Rome since 1515, tracking the trail of both prelatical usury and sodomy inside the Roman institution for the past 498 years. 

This ungoldly rot did not commence with the Enlightenment or the French Revolution or Vatican II. If you believe that hoax, which is a staple fiction among "traditional" Catholics, then you will never have the ability to decode the present manifestation of Mystery Babylon that has the putative "Vicar of Christ on earth" saying he cannot judge sodomite-prone Catholic priests. This type of boldface papal lying is nothing short of a challenge to the hypnotized sheeple to see if we're going to take this satanic spew lying down, or whether we will stand up and witness for the truth of God's Word and that of His apostles, patriarchs and saints.

Pope Francis has no moral compass save for situation ethics. It was situation ethics that determined the legalization of the mortal sin of usury, first in the Church of Rome when John Calvin was but a child, and later by Calvin himself, under the influence of Rome’s lawyer’s equity, or epikeia, which is sometimes just, when used to modify the laws of man, but is always Talmudic and rabbinic when employed to modify or abrogate the laws of God.

The zeitgeist determines the ethics of the Vatican’s rebels against God. Today the spirit of the time is thoroughly homosexual and hence, the papacy accommodates itself to that perverted state of affairs. When the Money Power subsumed the zeitgeist during the Renaissance, an absolutist papacy opened the door to the beginnings of predatory capitalism. No pope has the right to alter God’s law. When he dares to do so, there must be  a mechanism in place to correct or depose him.

For the past 498 years, God’s eternal law has not been the guide or rule for papal situation ethicists. Within the Renaissance papacy, situation ethics trumped God’s law, and popery will see to it that by the time self-described Catholics finally begin to grasp that the absolute authority given to a pope bears within it the seeds of catastrophe, the catastrophe will be upon us. Christ intended for His followers to be overcomers, not slaves of mere men, much less a sinister clown in a white suit who invokes Jesus so as to mock Him and His eternal and unchanging law, whether in matters of loans of money (Luke 6: 32-26), or men who lay with men (Leviticus 18:22; Romans 1: 26-27).

Finally, let's promise ourselves that we will henceforth quit trafficking in Orwellian Newspeak, which imprisons our minds by causing us to think in the occluding manner in which the hidden persuaders frame this controversy. This is about sex in the rectal sewer of the human body. There is absolutely nothing innocent and joyful ("gay") about it, so let us cease our submission to the doublethink agenda imposed on us by our media masters when we are contending for the purity of our children against a ravening wolf in sheep's --or in this case, St Peter's -- clothing.

Hoffman is the author of Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not

***

Read More

Is “Pope Francis Good for the Jews”?

Wall Street Journal editorial says "Pope Francis is good for the Jews"

Three questions for the Wall Street Journal

By Michael Hoffman

1. In the Wall Street Journal editorial (see below) by Francis X. Rocca, Rome bureau chief for the Catholic News Service, modern popes are praised for repudiating the apostles, popes and saints of the past who sought to convert Jews and Judaics from Talmudic falsehood to the truth of Jesus Christ. Rocca's definition of a rehabilitated Catholic is someone who cooperates with Judaic self-worship and abandons Christ-rejecting Judaics to their damned condition. Is this not a virulent form of "Jew hate," disguised as reconciliation? Is Pope Francis actually “good for the Jews” -- or a terrible enemy who has abandoned them to eternal perdition?

2. Why did Jesus Christ incarnate on earth if not to convert the Jews and to have his followers convert all people, including the Judaics of the present? How can "Jews" be exempt from the Gospel commission to convert in light of Jesus' words in Matthew 15:24?

3. How is any "convenant" with the God of Israel maintained by adherents of Orthodox Judaism who nullify the Word of God in favor of their Babylonian Talmud, and the pagan, soothsayer traditions from which it is derived?

Hoffman is the author of Judaism Discovered, and Judaism's Strange Gods

WALL STREET JOURNAL p. A13. June 14, 2013 

***

Read More

On the Contrary blog scoops the world’s media

If you are an American who still reads the morning newspaper, then today (Wednesday June 12) many of you woke up with an internationally circulated Associated Press wire story headlined, "Pope tells group 'gay lobby' at work,” and a New York Times article that reported on: "...a network of gay priests inside the Vatican who used blackmail to gain influence and trade in state secrets."

This is news which On the Contrary readers had yesterday.

On Tuesday, June 11 there were only three sources in the world for this shocking revelation: the Spanish language "Reflection and Liberation" website in Chile, Rorate Caeli, a traditional Catholic blog, and our On the Contrary blog.

What does breaking news like this mean to you? Does the fact that we scooped websites a hundred times bigger and better funded than our service signify anything? We beat the Drudge Report, Salon and News Max in getting this story to you first, so you could be better informed and yesterday, when it came to the pope and the Vatican, readers of this blog were among the best informed people on the planet.

Along with the breaking news, yesterday we also asked that readers send a donation or order a book, CD or newsleter from our online store.

No donations were received. Two people ordered newsletters, but their orders may have had nothing to do with On the Contrary. They may have accessed our online store through Google or Amazon or some other source.

Yes, this blog is a "free" service. Nothing is free, however, except God's grace. On the Contrary is made possible solely by donations and orders to our store. Consequently "free" translates into at least a minority of idealistic truth seekers supporting our service by either donating funds, or buying items from our online bookstore, for the benefit of the majority of readers who send nothing and who apparently imagine they are doing us a favor just by reading our columns.

Yesterday we broke world-historic news. The Vatican Secretariat of State had previously called the  rumors of a homosexual mafia governing the Church through the Curia "unverified, unverifiable or completely false." The new pope has now revealed that it's true: sodomites are administering the modern Catholic Church.

If scooping the media of the world is not enough to motivate at least a few dozen of the thousands of On the Contrary readers to donate a few bucks now and then, or buy a newsletter or a book, how will we continue this service?  What will it take to pry a $10 donation or a $25 book order from your purse?

Donations:
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page1/page2/paypal.html

Online Revisionist History Bookstore
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page7/page7.html 

***

Read More

Pope admits there is a "Gay Lobby" in the Roman Curia

...and hints that Traditional Catholicism ("restorationist groups") has no future

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/06/pope-to-latin-american-religious-full.html  

On June 6, 2013, the Pope received the presiding board of the CLAR (the Latin American and Caribbean Confederation of Religious Men and Women - Confederación Latinoamericana y Caribe?a de Religiosos y Religiosas) -- three nuns and three priests. A transcript of the pope's words was made by those present, and given to the Chilean ultra-progressive page Reflexión y Liberación (Reflection and Liberation) for exclusive publication.

Words in (parentheses) are part of the original transcript to provide the context. Words in [square brackets] were added by us to clarify language difficulties and explain a few points.

I share with you two concerns. One is the Pelagian current that there is in the Church at this moment. There are some restorationist groups. I know some, it fell upon me to receive them in Buenos Aires. And one feels as if one goes back 60 years! Before the Council... One feels in 1940... An anecdote, just to illustrate this, it is not to laugh at it, I took it with respect, but it concerns me; when I was elected, I received a letter from one of these groups, and they said: "Your Holiness, we offer you this spiritual treasure: 3,525 rosaries." Why don't they say, 'we pray for you, we ask...', but this thing of counting... And these groups return to practices and to disciplines that I lived through - not you, because you are not old - to disciplines, to things that in that moment took place, but not now, they do not exist today...

The second [concern] is for a Gnostic current. Those Pantheisms... Both are elite currents, but this one is of a more educated elite... I heard of a superior general that prompted the sisters of her congregation to not pray in the morning, but to spiritually bathe in the cosmos, things like that... They concern me because they ignore the incarnation! And the Son of God became our flesh, the Word was made flesh, and in Latin America we have flesh abundantly [de tirar al techo]! What happens to the poor, their pains, this is our flesh...

The gospel is not the old rule, nor this Pantheism. If you look at the periphery; the destitute... the drug addicts! The traffic of people... This is the gospel. The poor are the gospel... +

And, yes... it is difficult. In the Curia,* there are also holy people, really, there are holy people. But there also is a stream of corruption, there is that as well, it is true... The "gay lobby" is mentioned, and it is true, it is there... We need to see what we can do...

(Emphasis supplied)

+ "The poor are the gospel...” Pope Francis contradicts Jesus Christ in Matthew 26:11. The gospel is the good news about the coming of the Messiah, the Son of God. In the grace and spirit of Jesus Christ, tremendous compassion and concern are to be shown to the poor;  this is an action of the gospel, but it is not the gospel. The poor are not God (Acts 10:34; 1 Peter 1:17). The Gospel is the Way of Jesus Christ. Any pontiff truly concerned about the poor would shut the Vatican Bank, restore the ancient Catholic Church’s immutable law against interest on loans of money, and refuse communion to any unrepentant operator of a savings or commercial bank, "payday loan" or similar usury-based business. 

*Curia: The administrative apparatus and central governing body of the Catholic Church.

For further research:

Original Spanish text:
http://www.reflexionyliberacion.cl/articulo/2729/papa-francisco-dialoga-como-un-hermano-mas-con-la-clar.html

Support the continuation of Michael Hoffman's On the Contrary

Buy a book, newsletter or CD, or send a donation.

***

Read More